Crade's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
from the favorite-them-up dept
This week's favorites post comes from crade
Happy Saturday to the workers. I guess we have another week of dirty tech and it would be good to review, summarize, and have a look at the best posts of the week. We aren't going to, though; we are going to have a look at the ones I happened to take a fancy to instead.
Now I am a great lover of irony and one of the things I have found the most ironic about this whole ever-encroaching copyright "cage of security" is that while the biggest pushers for a smaller cage claim it's all for the protection of the artists, they are near legendary for their constant mistreatment of those artists. Not only that but copyright is one of the strongest tools they have used to do it. So it was in the heyday of vinyl and so it is today. So, here they are again, using copyright legislation to force the takedown of the work of an emerging artist. And using their stricter rules to censor people trying to speak against them and to keep people from trying to be artists all while Senator Leahy claims there is no First Amendment issue at all.
Ironic enough? Ha! It gets better. At the same time that the record labels use stricter laws to censor new music, they are also breaking the law themselves. The artists are lining up to sue the labels for infringment and the record labels could owe them up to $2 billion. Of course making sure artists get paid for their hard work is the labels' greatest desire, their raison-d'être and certainly the reason they need to make the security cage so tight we can't breathe.
I know I shouldn't find this stuff funny, but I can't help it.
Besides being a lover of irony, I am a somewhat lawfully minded individual. I believe in the law (to a decent extent). Laws are decided jointly, to a minimum extent (if they were not, there would be rebellion), and when the law is wrong, or bad, I believe it needs to be addressed, not reinterpreted to do "less" harm, nor ignored nor casually broken. Now laws that are wrong are not easy to fix, certainly my opinion is not going to do it, and I'm not entirely convinced even logical arguments from the Harvard Business Review, explaining how big content is strangling innovation, are going to get the job done. In order to get laws changed, we need outrage.
The completely unjustified secrecy around ACTA generated some nice controversy and got a few people asking questions, and now with the TPP, they may be doing the same thing. Splendid! Alzheimer's Institute of America directly interfering with Alzheimer's research by suing a bunch of other researchers has the potential to ruffle a few feathers. Although the ridiculous liability issues Google and Yahoo are facing (Google is being found liable for its Autocomplete Suggestions and Yahoo for its users being able to search for infringing movies) are over in Italy this week, perhaps it is a sign of things to come. Or maybe it will piss them off enough to start doing more about the issue in general.
We have seen that people are willing to get up in arms about the hyperbolic amount of cashola involved in copyright infringement lawsuits, so maybe it's a good thing that the record companies aren't letting up on that front, as well, and are still appealing to try to get Joel Tenenbaum to pay $675,000 for downloading a measly 30 songs. Sliding in at the last minute, Denmark's recent decision to endorse retroactive copyright extensions sure seems outrageous to me, so here's hoping it makes some waves.
So thats what I come to Techdirt for. A little humor, and hopefully some pot stirring and a bit of hope for the future!
(untitled comment)
"unsurprising and belated efforts to mimic products and services that already exist"
Hey now, nothing wrong with that.. The problem comes because knowing telecoms their definition of competition is to get subsidies from the government when they do terribly and otherwise to buy legislation to gift the market to them
Re: You're all reasonable, right? AND DIDN'T BELIEVE HER!
But thats the funny part.. She is arguing that people who say she is full of shit up to her eyebrows are completely right, she shouldn't be taken seriously and basically anyone who believes what she says is a moron
(untitled comment)
On transparency...
I am hopeful or idealistic that obfuscation is a just stopgap tool for moderation just as I see it for tech security and it eventually moderation policy will be solid enough that companies will be able to open about how they do it without worrying about the loopholes being so bad that they will be vastly exploited
Maybe but..
I find interesting the concept that the employees working in these positions are viewed internally as "helper" types.
This to me reminds me of police officers and politicians.. Basically the trouble I see is that positions of this type are totally the positions that would naturally attract helper types, but they are also the positions that would naturally attract people who want or think they deserve to have and assert power over others, which are, in my mind, the opposite of what you want in those positions.
In my mind it's not just about getting the right type of people in those positions, but about people knowing that you have the right people in those positions.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Schooling
Well you are clear to weigh in as long as no reasonable person would ever think you are telling the truth right? I think I'm getting it now
Re: Re: Schooling
No, no, OP is complaining that the Tim is discussing law. People aren't allowed to discuss law unless they are attorneys and such. A journalist is only ever supposed to research or discuss journalism.
(untitled comment)
Parents should be responsible for any real discretions by their kids at that age..
I think the trouble here goes a ways beyond just the fact that kids can be targeted by lawsuits like this all the way to the government is helicopter parenting the adults they can't solve minor problems and disagreements amongst each other anymore without going to court
(untitled comment)
It was a scapegoat you were giving a mob of people you knew perfectly well were desperate for any excuse, didn't give 2 shits about credibility and would take what you said at face value. Just because the harm didn't come from credibility doesn't mean you didn't cause it knowingly.
Re: Re: Re: So how do you explain the Havanna embassy incidents?
I was aiming more for the
" but frankly you do that every time conservatives offer easy to grasp explanations"
part, which has more credibility to me.
Just look at how long corrupt pseudo-science managed to keep "cigarettes cause cancer" down.
Re: 'No, we're not, and you don't want us to be either.'
Which isn't neutrality at all, it's laissez-fair or shirking, but that choice is already available in several different places. Not many people don't pick those choices because not many people want that.
The thing is no politician is honestly pushing for that either, they are just throwing a fit with no real plan. Some are pushing for a neutral ref as in the sort that will try to rig the game to be tied, some are pushing for less freedom, more control for control's sake, but no one seems to have any vision of what their proposed changes are going actually to accomplish
(untitled comment)
"We listen."
How do you avoid squeaky wheel syndrome, so the most obnoxious don't end up the best served?
Re: So how do you explain the Havanna embassy incidents?
An "easy to grasp explanation" is otherwise known as a guess (maybe an educated guess if you are being generous).. What you do in that case is check to see if you can validate your guess.. Thats what studies like this are trying to do.. If you find that the guess doesn't validate, then you assume that guess was wrong and move on to the next one. It's not perfect for sure, the validation can be flawed instead, but as the independent validations pile up you can get pretty good confidence in them.
Re:
I was going to ask if there were any studies showing it helps us yet
Re: Re: Re: The real issue here...
It's not about the value of the result it's about the process.. Computers don't swallow bullshit nearly as well as people do. "antifa faked it" might get you out of jury duty, but it won't get your drunken idea of tracking feces in comment sections off the ground. Maybe once quantum computing starts to take off though :)
Re: The real issue here...
"I admittedly do not 100% believe this"
I believe trying to hire software engineers to work at parler is probably a similar task to trying to hire lawyers for trump.. Probably not a large percentage of computer scientists who are anti-science
Re: Re:
The distinction between the government making laws to abridge speech about politicians vs other public figures from an originalist viewpoint?
It's supposed to limit the government's power to abridge any speech, not just speech about the government
You think they meant something like
Congress shall make no law .. abridging the freedom of speech [unless the speech isn't about the government, in that case abridge away]?
(untitled comment)
"Thomas' anger at the Sullivan standard seemed to be... that it let too many people be mean to public figures"
Except that they made an special case for public figures as an excuse to get away with suppressing such speech without running too obviously afoul of the first amendment like criticizing politicians. If you want to be originalist and treating everyone the same, it would be enforcing the first amendment for discussing regular people not throwing it out for discussing politicians
Re: Re: Re: You're about to pee your pants with excitement.
One of them actually claims Jesus as it's antithesis as well.. Why is it so hard to find the quotes from that book that directly mention Jesus? I'm not rereading that hot garbage
Re: Re: Human stupidity predates the internet
Social media lets word travel faster than before but it doesn't decide which words travel.
Electing to put someone in charge who believes the truth is only good for inconveniencing him is what really amplified the message.
Combined with a political system that brands you a traitor if you don't tow party line and a tradition of the world looking to the U.S. for leadership and you don't need more help, newspapers tv and radio would have worked just fine
Re: Re: Re: Re: On the ZOMBIE front, here's "Derek" out, 2nd 2 y
I dont buy it.. gotta be alteriour motive not just nuts.. the way he dumps nonsense and never backs anything up or even acknowledge when shown indisputably wrong is all sabotage, no belief..
More comments from crade >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by crade.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt